14016Re: [ANE-2] Oldest writing system
- Jan 6, 2012On Jan 6, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Jgibson wrote:
> On 1/6/2012 1:20 PM, Steve Farmer wrote:Silly among other reasons since
>> Diana Gainer writes, in this rather silly thread on the "first writing system":
> Why is it silly?
> And speaking of those who do not read things, or pay attention to what
> they read, PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS ACCORDING TO OUR PROTOCOLS!
> Jeffrey Gibson
> -- --- Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon. 1500 W. Pratt Blvd Chicago, Il.
1. The so-called "Mas-d'Azilian pebble script", supposedly going back to ca. 10,000 ybp, hasn't been taken seriously by anyone since the first decade of the 20th century. See the references Trudy provided, which I sent her off-List.
2. The inchoate discussion of "Jiroft writing" is equally silly, since it has been known in the field since 2007 that the inscriptions in question are obvious modern fakes. That has been discussed among many others by me (I published the first high-resolution photo of the inscriptions online in 2007, on the Indo-Eurasian Research List, which were leaked to me by archaeologists on the project who knew they were fakes), by Richard Sproat, and -- more importantly -- by specialists on proto-Elamite and linear Elamite like Jakob Dahl. Jakob discussed this both at the August, 2007 Stanford Conference I alluded to earlier on our work and in Europe that summer.
Much of this was reported in a 2007 article in Science, where Jakob as I recall reported to Science reporter Andrew Lawler that they were obvious fakes. Archaeologists with a stake in Iranian digs have a hard time saying such things if they want to dig. The same goes for archaeologists who question the Indus "script" myth.
Steve Farmer, Ph.D.
Palo Alto, California
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>